Yes, it is quite possible that he at least met her and “interviewed” her, as ConstantineTG says. That would explain how he got so many details about the nativity and birth of Jesus
The gospels are not the biography of Jesus, but the story of salvation through Christ. Therefore there is no issue of “non comparability”.
Matthew was an apostle chosen by Jesus who knew Him personally. Matthew knew scripture well, and takes care to point out how Jesus fulfilled ancient prophecies about the Messias.
The stories are incompatible with one another…
The star appeared only at the birth of Christ. It would have taken the Magi a long time to get there, anytime between a few weeks up to two years. Why would Herod have male children age 2 and under killed if the Magi arrived within hours or days of seeing the star? It would have made sense to just have newborns killed.
The fleeing also happened when Jesus was much older. Going to the temple should be done on the 8th day according to Jewish law.
The Bible isn’t mean to give a full historical accounting of all the events. That is how we think today, but not back then. Even the style of writing is typical of their time where narratives seem to just flow from one story to the next without regards of the actual timing. Back then people care less about the minute-by-minute events as we do today.
The genealogies are presented in a way that make sense to the target audience at the time. Again, try not to read them from a 21st century wired world perspective. These are 1st century Jews and Greek Gentiles we are talking about here, it was a different time and a different culture.
I don’t think Luke would have asked for a CNN-type of eyewitnes account from Mary anyway. Think of it this way, you go visit someone and you tell stories about each other. Luke probably didn’t come to Mary as a Gospel writer. The Apostles adored Mary and would pay her homage every so often. Luke would have come with Paul and probably had a casual conversation about it.They are not eyewitness accounts…no one “interviewed” Mary…in fact components of both narratives have parallels in OT stories of the birth of the great heroes…but them…I’m “heretical” in my beliefs anyway.
I think this is a Hebrew / Aramaic <–> Greek translation issue. Remember back that time, Paul used the scriptures from the Septuagint, which was translated from Hebrew into Greek in order to be part of the collection of the Library of Alexandria:From an article…don’t have the source…I copied it from a “Draft” file I have.
**"“Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;”
The Greek word for “seed” is “sperma” [Strongs#4690]
Only males have “sperma” and woman do not.
“according to the flesh;” indicates a human progenitor.
Paul wrote that Jesus had a male progenitor or father who was a descendant of King David.
But the Gospel writers Matthew and Luke wrote that Jesus had a virgin birth by Mary through the Holy Spirit who is not a flesh human and not a descendant of King David."**
Must have had the discussion with Luke after he wrote Romans.
The Protoevangelium of James says that Mary is from the House of David as well.
